Category: Security News

  • AI Is Turning CISOs Into Business-Risk Translators, Says Nvidia’s Head of Cyber

    Nvidia’s Mark Weatherford says CISOs must translate AI cybersecurity risks into business priorities, clarify risk ownership and balance innovation with security controls

    Source: Infosecurity Magazine · 2026-10-28

  • Energy Giant Engie Notifies Customers of Supply Chain Breach

    An undisclosed number of Engie customers have had their data compromised after a supply chain incident

    Source: Infosecurity Magazine · 2026-10-28

  • Banks are blocking AI agents from customer accounts

    This week, Axios reported that major US banks were detecting third-party AI agents operating inside customer accounts. In many cases, customers have given the agents their usernames and passwords so they could act on their behalf. This kind of access can violate a bank’s rules.

    Bianco Research president Jim Bianco raised the question during Unchained’s Bits + Bips livestream on October 26:

    “Are you protecting me, or are you protecting your own profits?”

    Bianco described traditional finance’s business model as “based on laziness.” Customers may leave idle cash in low- or no-interest bank accounts rather than move it into a money market fund. An AI agent could make that move for them. “Now that you’re able to do it, the banks are afraid they’re gonna lose that revenue stream,” he said.

    The banks offer a different explanation. JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon said the bank wouldn’t allow just any outside agent into its systems because doing so was “too risky for clients and for JPMorgan.”

    Both explanations can be true: banks can want to retain deposits while also facing real security problems when software acts through customers’ accounts.

    Handing over your banking login introduces another service into the security chain. A vulnerability in that service could expose your credentials or allow your account to be misused. And as Bank of America reportedly pointed out:

     “If you do share your credentials, keep in mind that you’re responsible for activity resulting from that access.”

    That’s the bank’s stated position, not a universal ruling on consumers’ legal rights. Still, it’s a warning worth taking seriously.

    Pros and cons

    An AI agent with permission to make purchases might find and buy an item at a lower price. But giving an agent access to your bank account also means sharing sensitive banking information with a third party. We’ve seen shared AI chats become searchable online too.

    Axios reported that many banks allow, or are moving toward allowing, read-only access. This can let a tool analyze transactions without giving it permission to move money.

    That’s an important boundary, but it doesn’t make the information harmless. An agent that can read bank statements may still disclose them if it’s compromised or manipulated. Preventing transactions and protecting confidentiality are separate security goals.

    How to keep control of your money

    For consumers, the practical question is not whether banks have perfectly selfless motives. It’s what access you’re giving away, and what could happen if the agent makes a mistake.

    • Don’t paste banking passwords or security codes into a general-purpose AI assistant. Major banks have explicitly warned customers against sharing their credentials.
    • Use your bank’s approved connection methods rather than giving an agent your login. Where supported, choose read-only access if all you need is analysis or budgeting help.
    • Give agents access to as little sensitive information as possible. An assistant comparing publicly advertised savings rates doesn’t need your bank statements. OpenAI recommends limiting agents to the data and credentials they need for the task.
    • Review consequential actions yourself. If an agent asks for confirmation, check exactly what it intends to do and what information it will share. Don’t treat a confirmation prompt as a formality.

    AI can make it easier to compare financial products and spot opportunities you might otherwise miss. But an assistant that finds a better rate and an agent that can act inside your account are different propositions.

    Let it help with the homework, but be cautious about handing it the keys.


    Let’s face it, an incognito window can only do so much. 
     
    Breaches, dark web trading, credit fraud. Malwarebytes Identity Theft Protection monitors for all of it, alerts you fast, and comes with identity theft insurance. 

    Source: Malwarebytes Labs · 2026-10-28

  • Hackers Target Critical Oracle E-Business Suite RCE Flaw Days After Security Patch

    Hackers Target Critical Oracle E-Business Suite RCE Flaw Days After Security Patch

    Threat actors are beginning to probe for a newly patched critical vulnerability in Oracle E-Business Suite (EBS), according to threat intelligence firm Defused Cyber.

    The vulnerability in question is CVE-2026-101767 (CVSS score: 9.8) , a case of improper authentication in the Oracle Application Object Library of Oracle E-Business Suite. It was patched by Oracle last week as part of its Critical

    Source: The Hacker News · 2026-10-28

  • Cisco open sources tool for detecting AI agents on hacking sprees

    Cisco open sources tool for detecting AI agents on hacking sprees

    Cisco has open sourced a behavior detection engine that watches AI agents, to help security teams prevent rogue agents from going off the rails like they did with the Hugging Face hack – or worse. It’s called Project Quarry, and it aims to provide a “shared language” for evaluating agent behavior, along the lines of what Snort, which Cisco also maintains, did for detecting malicious network traffic and what YARA did for rule-based malware identification. Most detection tools rely on specific interactions with an AI model or agent. Did it attempt prompt injection? Or did the agent call an attack tool? “But what is missing is the entire context under which something may occur,” Amy Chang, head of AI threat and security research at Cisco, said in an exclusive interview with The Register. She likened this to credit card fraud detection. Without context, individual transactions such as a small test charge or a single purchase in a location far away from a card-holder’s usual location may not raise any flags. “And then you try again,” making another fraudulent purchase, “and that went through, too. So now I’m gonna buy the PS5,” Chang said. “Those are the things that Quarry addresses by taking into consideration the entire agent session,” she explained. “One tool call may seem in-scope until you realize that that next step is taking that information and sending it to an attacker-controlled inbox or server.” Even data theft is a sequence and not a single agentic action. Agentic AI security firm Invariant Labs demonstrated this with a proof-of-concept attack against GitHub’s MCP server that hijacked a user’s agent via a malicious GitHub Issue, and coerced it into leaking data from private repositories. Simply reading a configuration file, or sending a request to an external endpoint may be legitimate agentic actions. However, combining the two can lead to data exfiltration – and shows “why action relationships matter,” wrote Chang and fellow Cisco researchers Adam Swanda, Ravikumar Balakrishnan, and Konstantin Berlin in a blog post about Quarry shared with The Register ahead of publication “A policy can produce a finding when the trace shows a sensitive file read followed within a defined window by an external send,” they wrote. “The risk comes from the relationship between the two actions, so the finding should preserve evidence from both.” Quarry covers single- and multi-turn large language model conversations, agents, tool use, Model Context Protocol (MCP) interactions, and multimodal inputs. In addition to the open source code itself, the project’s GitHub repository includes installation instructions, supported Python versions, plugins for Claude Code, Codex and other MCP-compatible agents, configuration examples, rule-writing guidance, and a rule starter pack. For instance, with the rule pack, “If a base-64 encoded malware is somewhere in the tool call, that would result in a block,” Chang said. The rule format looks similar to a YARA or Snort rule, with a header that details the traffic to examine, content to match, and metadata for tracking the rule. Here’s a Quarry rule that flags an agent that reads a credentials file: While the Cisco Ai researchers have not run Quarry against data describing the OpenAI-Hugging Face incident, they suggest that if the intrusion had been read as a complete, step-by-step record of a single session, there were several points where the AI agents’ steps would have given a Quarry rule something to act on and flag for humans. For example, Quarry would probably have flagged internet access from a sandbox. “The rule can flag specific tool calls that reach an external server asset that wasn’t in the task’s allow list,” Chang said. “Another one would be credentials found and used somewhere else.” According to OpenAI’s technical report about the Hugging Face intrusion, this is exactly what happened on July 10, when an agent validated 14 exposed Hugging Face tokens with write access and shared them. “The rule would flag that there was a credential in the tool result that then called an outside service, which is likely not within the parameters of what you would want to do in this case,” Chang said. “We don’t want you to go and search for credentials that may have been leaked or inadvertently exposed and then utilize them to conduct a task.” The Cisco team is quick to say that rules along are not a substitute for chain-of-thought monitors, or other forms of human oversight – but they do help record a pattern that other teams can then “review, test, and apply to their own agents,” they wrote. Herein also lies the benefit of open source, and a collective approach to defending against adversarial use of AI, Chang said. “Do we have all the answers? No,” Chang said. “We all see slices of the problem, and it’s important for us to share what we see.”®

    Source: The Register — Security · 2026-10-28

  • Cisco open sources tool for detecting AI agents on hacking sprees

    Cisco open sources tool for detecting AI agents on hacking sprees

    Cisco has open sourced a behavior detection engine that watches AI agents, to help security teams prevent rogue agents from going off the rails like they did with the Hugging Face hack – or worse. It’s called Project Quarry, and it aims to provide a “shared language” for evaluating agent behavior, along the lines of what Snort, which Cisco also maintains, did for detecting malicious network traffic and what YARA did for rule-based malware identification. Most detection tools rely on specific interactions with an AI model or agent. Did it attempt prompt injection? Or did the agent call an attack tool? “But what is missing is the entire context under which something may occur,” Amy Chang, head of AI threat and security research at Cisco, said in an exclusive interview with The Register. She likened this to credit card fraud detection. Without context, individual transactions such as a small test charge or a single purchase in a location far away from a card-holder’s usual location may not raise any flags. “And then you try again,” making another fraudulent purchase, “and that went through, too. So now I’m gonna buy the PS5,” Chang said. “Those are the things that Quarry addresses by taking into consideration the entire agent session,” she explained. “One tool call may seem in-scope until you realize that that next step is taking that information and sending it to an attacker-controlled inbox or server.” Even data theft is a sequence and not a single agentic action. Agentic AI security firm Invariant Labs demonstrated this with a proof-of-concept attack against GitHub’s MCP server that hijacked a user’s agent via a malicious GitHub Issue, and coerced it into leaking data from private repositories. Simply reading a configuration file, or sending a request to an external endpoint may be legitimate agentic actions. However, combining the two can lead to data exfiltration – and shows “why action relationships matter,” wrote Chang and fellow Cisco researchers Adam Swanda, Ravikumar Balakrishnan, and Konstantin Berlin in a blog post about Quarry shared with The Register ahead of publication “A policy can produce a finding when the trace shows a sensitive file read followed within a defined window by an external send,” they wrote. “The risk comes from the relationship between the two actions, so the finding should preserve evidence from both.” Quarry covers single- and multi-turn large language model conversations, agents, tool use, Model Context Protocol (MCP) interactions, and multimodal inputs. In addition to the open source code itself, the project’s GitHub repository includes installation instructions, supported Python versions, plugins for Claude Code, Codex and other MCP-compatible agents, configuration examples, rule-writing guidance, and a rule starter pack. For instance, with the rule pack, “If a base-64 encoded malware is somewhere in the tool call, that would result in a block,” Chang said. The rule format looks similar to a YARA or Snort rule, with a header that details the traffic to examine, content to match, and metadata for tracking the rule. Here’s a Quarry rule that flags an agent that reads a credentials file: While the Cisco Ai researchers have not run Quarry against data describing the OpenAI-Hugging Face incident, they suggest that if the intrusion had been read as a complete, step-by-step record of a single session, there were several points where the AI agents’ steps would have given a Quarry rule something to act on and flag for humans. For example, Quarry would probably have flagged internet access from a sandbox. “The rule can flag specific tool calls that reach an external server asset that wasn’t in the task’s allow list,” Chang said. “Another one would be credentials found and used somewhere else.” According to OpenAI’s technical report about the Hugging Face intrusion, this is exactly what happened on July 10, when an agent validated 14 exposed Hugging Face tokens with write access and shared them. “The rule would flag that there was a credential in the tool result that then called an outside service, which is likely not within the parameters of what you would want to do in this case,” Chang said. “We don’t want you to go and search for credentials that may have been leaked or inadvertently exposed and then utilize them to conduct a task.” The Cisco team is quick to say that rules along are not a substitute for chain-of-thought monitors, or other forms of human oversight – but they do help record a pattern that other teams can then “review, test, and apply to their own agents,” they wrote. Herein also lies the benefit of open source, and a collective approach to defending against adversarial use of AI, Chang said. “Do we have all the answers? No,” Chang said. “We all see slices of the problem, and it’s important for us to share what we see.”®

    Source: The Register Security · 2026-10-28

  • Critical 16-Year-Old UEFI Flaw Can Run Code Before Secure Boot on Network-Booting Servers

    Critical 16-Year-Old UEFI Flaw Can Run Code Before Secure Boot on Network-Booting Servers

    A critical 16-year-old flaw in EDK II, the open-source code that most hardware makers use to build UEFI firmware, can allow an attacker to run code on a machine before its operating system loads, but only while the machine is booting over the network.

    UEFI firmware is the software that runs first when a computer is switched on, before the operating system. An attacker who can reach the machine

    Source: The Hacker News · 2026-10-28

  • 123 Reg discloses ‘AI cyberattack’ on customer data, suspects China nexus

    123 Reg discloses ‘AI cyberattack’ on customer data, suspects China nexus

    UK domain registrar 123 Reg (no relation – Ed) says it was the victim of an “AI-driven cyberattack” that exposed customer data. Customers began receiving their notification emails this week, informing them that their contact information, “related customer relationship data,” company VAT numbers, and “product information from an application programming interface (API)” were compromised. A company spokesperson elaborated, saying this means that names, phone numbers, countries, language and currency preferences, account creation dates, the products on the account, and marketing preferences were affected. 123 Reg described the September 18 intrusion as “the first known AI-driven cyberattack against our company,” and told The Register that early signs point toward a China-nexus attacker. “Our investigation identified IP addresses that we assessed to be the core attacker infrastructure, which were hosted in China and Singapore, indicating a strong Chinese nexus,” the spokesperson said.  “Our investigation further identified AI cyberattack ‘skills’ hosted on Chinese infrastructure, including copies of skills open sourced by Anthropic and several other AI exploitation frameworks and scripts.” They went on to say that many of the artefacts left behind led 123 Reg to suspect that a Chinese state-sponsored group, known for abusing Claude Code in attacks against at least 30 organizations, could be behind the break-in. There is also a suspicion that the same group that hit a number of South Korea’s financial institutions using open-source Chinese AI tool ARTEX, was behind the attack on 123 Reg too. “The TA’s mirror of ‘anthropic_skills,’ and the account naming conventions found on the Chinese servers are consistent with preparation of this class of AI-augmented operation,” the spokesperson told us.  “In addition, on October 7, 2026, CrowdStrike published CSA-261162, describing an unknown, likely Chinese-speaking actor that targeted several South Korean financial organizations starting in late September 2026, which is the same period during which we were attacked. “That actor used ARTEX, an open-source Chinese-developed agentic penetration-testing tool released in July 2026, which was also observed to be used in the attack that targeted us.” The GoDaddy-owned registrar reported the attack to law enforcement agencies, brought in outside cybersecurity support, and notified the FTC, as well as the data protection authorities in the UK and EU. The company spokesperson added that it worked with Singapore-based ISPs to shut down the attacker’s servers in the region, which helped disrupt the attack, in addition to “other actions by us and industry partners.” 123 Reg’s email to customers stated the attacker’s activity “was limited to reading” customer data, although the spokesperson told us “it’s possible they created copies of the information,” and that this is what prompted the notification. The registrar urged customers to stay alert to the potential misuse of their data, and to treat communications appearing to come from the company with caution. “If you receive a message or call and aren’t sure it’s from 123 Reg, go directly to our website and log in,” the email said. “We will never contact you to request your password, payment details, or verification codes by email, text, or phone. “We also strongly recommend turning on two-step verification (2SV), which helps keep your account protected even if someone tricks you into sharing your password. You can find instructions for setting up 2SV in your 123 Reg account. “We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused.” ®

    Source: The Register — Security · 2026-10-28

  • 123 Reg discloses ‘AI cyberattack’ on customer data, suspects China nexus

    123 Reg discloses ‘AI cyberattack’ on customer data, suspects China nexus

    UK domain registrar 123 Reg (no relation – Ed) says it was the victim of an “AI-driven cyberattack” that exposed customer data. Customers began receiving their notification emails this week, informing them that their contact information, “related customer relationship data,” company VAT numbers, and “product information from an application programming interface (API)” were compromised. A company spokesperson elaborated, saying this means that names, phone numbers, countries, language and currency preferences, account creation dates, the products on the account, and marketing preferences were affected. 123 Reg described the September 18 intrusion as “the first known AI-driven cyberattack against our company,” and told The Register that early signs point toward a China-nexus attacker. “Our investigation identified IP addresses that we assessed to be the core attacker infrastructure, which were hosted in China and Singapore, indicating a strong Chinese nexus,” the spokesperson said.  “Our investigation further identified AI cyberattack ‘skills’ hosted on Chinese infrastructure, including copies of skills open sourced by Anthropic and several other AI exploitation frameworks and scripts.” They went on to say that many of the artefacts left behind led 123 Reg to suspect that a Chinese state-sponsored group, known for abusing Claude Code in attacks against at least 30 organizations, could be behind the break-in. There is also a suspicion that the same group that hit a number of South Korea’s financial institutions using open-source Chinese AI tool ARTEX, was behind the attack on 123 Reg too. “The TA’s mirror of ‘anthropic_skills,’ and the account naming conventions found on the Chinese servers are consistent with preparation of this class of AI-augmented operation,” the spokesperson told us.  “In addition, on October 7, 2026, CrowdStrike published CSA-261162, describing an unknown, likely Chinese-speaking actor that targeted several South Korean financial organizations starting in late September 2026, which is the same period during which we were attacked. “That actor used ARTEX, an open-source Chinese-developed agentic penetration-testing tool released in July 2026, which was also observed to be used in the attack that targeted us.” The GoDaddy-owned registrar reported the attack to law enforcement agencies, brought in outside cybersecurity support, and notified the FTC, as well as the data protection authorities in the UK and EU. The company spokesperson added that it worked with Singapore-based ISPs to shut down the attacker’s servers in the region, which helped disrupt the attack, in addition to “other actions by us and industry partners.” 123 Reg’s email to customers stated the attacker’s activity “was limited to reading” customer data, although the spokesperson told us “it’s possible they created copies of the information,” and that this is what prompted the notification. The registrar urged customers to stay alert to the potential misuse of their data, and to treat communications appearing to come from the company with caution. “If you receive a message or call and aren’t sure it’s from 123 Reg, go directly to our website and log in,” the email said. “We will never contact you to request your password, payment details, or verification codes by email, text, or phone. “We also strongly recommend turning on two-step verification (2SV), which helps keep your account protected even if someone tricks you into sharing your password. You can find instructions for setting up 2SV in your 123 Reg account. “We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused.” ®

    Source: The Register Security · 2026-10-28

  • Wazuh and AI for Enhanced SOC Workflows

    Wazuh and AI for Enhanced SOC Workflows

    Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become one of this decade’s defining technologies. From healthcare and finance to manufacturing and education, organizations increasingly rely on AI to automate repetitive tasks, uncover patterns hidden within large datasets, and support faster decision-making. Cybersecurity has experienced a similar transformation. While attackers employ AI to automate

    Source: The Hacker News · 2026-10-28